ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Reclassifying contralateral axillary metastasis: survival benefit of aggressive local therapy challenges stage IV designation.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contralateral axillary metastasis (CAM) is currently staged as M1 (stage IV) breast cancer, guiding treatment towards palliative systemic therapy. However, emerging evidence suggests CAM may behave as a locoregional event, potentially amenable to curative-intent strategies. This study aims to define the prognosis of isolated CAM and evaluate the survival impact of aggressive local therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1110 patients from two tertiary centers, comprising three cohorts: CAM (n=128), stage IIIC locally advanced breast cancer (LABC, n=532), and Results: The adjusted mortality risk for the CAM cohort was significantly lower than for the M1 cohort (aHR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45-0.74) but higher than for the LABC cohort (aHR 1.18, 95% CI 0.93-1.60). In the PSM analysis, curative-intent therapy was associated with a 51% reduction in mortality risk (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.31-0.78) and a significantly lower 5-year cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence (12.1% vs. 31.4%, p=0.005). Results were consistent across IPTW and multivariable analyses. Conclusion: Patients with isolated CAM exhibit a prognosis distinct from classic stage IV disease. A curative-intent local treatment strategy is independently associated with significantly improved survival and locoregional control, supporting the re-evaluation of CAM as a clinically regionally treatable entity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.